Transcript The ACCY 111 Experience - Victoria University of Wellington

The ACCY 111 Experience
•
•
•
Dr Philip Colquhoun
Professor Kevin Holmes
Professor Kevin Simpkins
School of Accounting and Commercial Law
A presentation to AKO Victoria 2011
Research funded by VUW teaching and learning grant
2010
The problem

Pass rate consistently remained relatively low
over number of years

Despite number of recent interventions
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦

More tutorials
Specialised tutorials
Introduction of on-line tests
Variety of teaching staff
Variety of assessment schemes
Looking to make changes to increase pass rate –
but need to be informed by what is the problem.
The problem – pass rate 1996 to 2010

People – students in ACCY 111
◦ Enrolled 18,799
◦ Failed 33.2% (6,249)

In dollars (we are accountants!)
◦ Approximately $33 million in revenue from
ACCY 111
◦ Approximately $11 million relate to students
that failed ACCY 111
 (based on a 15 point course at 2011 rates)
The problem - Societal waste

Funding
◦ Student funded
◦ Student debt
◦ Government expenditure

Personal cost
◦ Time
◦ Self esteem
The project
Two parts

Statistical study of 2009 ACCY 111 cohort
◦ What are the factors that impact on student
performance.

Structured interviews of ACCY 111 students in
second trimester 2010.
◦ Students’ perceptions and self reporting of behaviour
related to ACCY 111.

…. a selection of the insights …
From statistical study

Almost ¾ of the variability in pass grades
can be explained by
◦
◦
◦
◦
NCEA results
Mid-trimester test
Tutorial attendance
Use of online test and revision package
From statistical study

NCEA – level three
NECA performance is reflected in better performance in ACCY 111
if NECA performance includes:
◦ 21 excellence credits, or
◦ 34 merit credits, or
◦ 28 achieved credits in accounting

But… below these levels … those that had some NCEA credits
performed worse than those without any credits.

Implications
◦ Have we got the university (or degree) entry level right?
◦ Are there skills that some students fail to obtain via school and we don’t
seek to remedy this – rather continue to support performance below
ability and/or failure.
◦ NCEA – unit specification and “achieve is enough” versus less specified
requirements at ACCY 111.
From statistical study

Internal course work
All important
◦ Tutorial attendance
◦ Online work
 especially shorter and more frequent use was better

Implications
◦ Opportunities provided, but not taken up by
students
 Something wrong with how we provide them or
 Students are lazy/busy
From statistical study

Choice of major
Accounting and economic majors do better

Implications
◦ Accounting and economic students are brighter
therefore this is self-evident, or
◦ ACCY 111 has a strong focus on economic
worldview/thinking patterns and therefore bias to
those inclined to that worldview.
From statistical study
Ethnicity
 Compared to NZ European/Pakeha all other
groups performed worse,

African, Chinese and Other Pacific Peoples groups
being statistically significant

Implications
◦ Preparation and/or institutional factors.
◦ Accepting that business and accounting are cultural
artifacts are we assuming too much in our teaching.
From interviews
Reported time spent per week
◦ Expected at start of course = 6 hours
◦ Reported = 7.7 hours
◦ Reported for other courses = 7.9 hours
Expected grade
◦ At start B+
◦ At end B
From interviews
Usefulness
◦ 4 out of 5
 Very useful
 (1-5 Likert scale)
Perceived difficulty
◦ Week 1 = 2.8
◦ Week 6 = 3.6
 Got more difficult
 (Liket scale 1 easy – 5 difficult)
From interviews

Summary
◦
◦
◦
◦

They think it very useful,
Perceived difficultly increases during course,
Grade expectation drops
And they work longer on other courses
Implications
◦ Being difficult or useful may not help with
student motivation!
Where we are heading

New course proposed for 2012

2011
◦ On-line assessment
 More and worth significant part of final grade
◦ Tutorials
 More student discussion – less content focus(?)
 Tutor selection/management
Still unclear

What can we do about students coming in with poor
NCEA results?
◦ What is the(ir) problem?

How much understanding of commerce do students
entering the BCA degree come with ?

How to increase participation in course components
(e.g. online and tutorials)?
◦ At moment providing more but perhaps only used by
those that don’t need it.
◦ Measuring cost/ benefits of further interventions.

How university wide are these issues?